Will Ron Paul's C4L Eclipse The LP?

http://georgedonnelly.com/asides/evolved-into-anarchist

Skip, I most certainly do not "assume that the only way to fight pollution is through some sort of government action".  My actual position differs from your straw man, and is set forth at http://libertarianmajority.net/can-torts-police-all-negative-externalities.

I never said we can't dismantle one tax at a time.  Instead, I just pointed out that this (untenable) assertion is a corollary of your apparent belief that restricting taxation to just aggression (e.g. pollution) would inevitably lead back to Leviathan/fascism.  If instead you now say that it's possible within the political framework to make significant and enduring inroads against taxation, then I welcome your agreement with me.

I never said that the optimal level of pollution is zero.  That is yet another straw man.

Ron Paul's "Revolution" was effectively one man running in one race in one year.  The existence of the LP did not hinder Paul's candidacy, and in many ways made that candidacy possible.  Meanwhile, the idea of freedom is offered to millions of voters by hundreds of Libertarian candidates in every election year -- even the years when no Ron Paul is running.  As long as the State allows us to organize a freedom party that advocates against its own injustices, the freedom movement would be foolish not to take that opportunity.  I wish all the best for Ron Paul and his Campaign For Liberty, but I'm not willing to bet that candidates running under the C4L (or any other non-LP freedom-oriented) banner will get more votes and media exposure than the LP in 2012 and 2016.  Are you?  Most kinds of political activism aren't fungible zero-sum kinds of effort, and the ones that are point to the wisdom of having precisely one freedom party: http://libertarianintelligence.com/2008/09/why-multiple-freedom-parties-is-dumb.html